Richard Hood: Yes on all bonds — or else

A fellow teacher, ignoring the national no-call registry, tried to convince me to vote yes on the new Castaic school bond on the November ballot. He was already preaching to the choir as he passed the collection plate.

He didn’t have to convince me that “more money” is the perpetual solution to perpetually failing scores. Not me, for I am already a true believer.

Even though Dr. Greene, author of “Education Myths,” wrote, “If money were the solution, the problem would already be solved ... We’ve doubled per-pupil spending, adjusting for inflation, over the last 30 years, and yet schools aren’t better,”

I simply don’t believe this because it doesn’t fit my worldview.

Now, understand that for us educators, your savings, your views, and even history’s lessons don’t matter because this spending is a tenet of our substitute belief system.

Spending even more money, even when money didn’t work before, may not address the root problem. But roots are difficult, nasty things to get at, and we don’t like the way the world of reality works because it doesn’t make us feel good.

Don’t we want kids to “reach for the stars?” Well, the best way to achieve this is to make you, the taxpayer, “reach for the sky,” even as we try to become your kid’s de facto parents.

I suppose we could save for rainy days like responsible adults, but why should we when we can just get more money from you?

So, just like government-funded TV, we keep having these bond measure “pledge drives.” And if you don’t pledge, we will withhold classroom programing until you do.

Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Please, please withhold programming — stop programming our kids with your political agendas, and instead, use that wasted time and money for the important classes our kids are failing.”

What ... you weren’t thinking that? Hmmm ... good, don’t start. In the meantime, just remember that this bond measure will solve those core class problems, Yessiree. We promise. Again. This time for sure.

Or maybe next time.

We tell you that we’ll lose out on matching or directed grants, that they’ll be diverted to other causes. However, never ask where these “free” government grants come from — you don’t want to know.

So why aren’t these funds returned to you, the taxpayer, in the event of a “no” vote? Who cares, that’s why. Listen, Bub, the bank has already been robbed, and as the money isn’t headed back to the bank, we just want to make sure we get our share of the loot, okay?

Forget about it. It’s not like it was us who stole it, right? We’re just not going to say anything, are we?

And don’t be concerned about the bank’s security. Just be happy with what you’ve got, and with the fact that we don’t keep it all ... got it? Now, walk away. Remember, youse didn’t see nothin’.

Look, trade protection rackets and monopolies like ours don’t produce the same results as healthy competition. As we would rather have this control than better results for you and your kids, our teacher’s unions spend millions to fight all forms of parent choice to keep our monopoly, just as we fight the removal of bad teachers, despite our position being destructive to children.

Please don’t notice this contradiction between what we say and what we do — it doesn’t make us feel good. Our unions are anti-choice on every issue except one. And remember we, not you, are the professionals, and you are only the “co-parents.”

Repeat this until you believe it.

Want to hear a sweet deal? Our state Legislature is a wholly owned subsidiary of the teachers union that gives your legislators lots of money, and whose teachers then call you asking for more money.

And give your will, because it makes you feel good. I tell you, it’s a thing of beauty, this thing of ours. Bada bing, bada boom. Tony Soprano should feel like an amateur.

Richard Hood, when not resorting to sarcastic satire to make a point, encourages teachers to contact Pacific Justice Institute, who helped him divert his teachers union dues to special needs adoptions, pro-life and pro-family charities of his own “pro-choice.”